Seriously,…you guys need a better scanner – no doubt! But thx for the effort!

JMD

LGO

The image quality is good enough to see that there is a DX lens and 3 FX lenses.

I wonder if the preponderance of FX lenses means that Nikon will soon be releasing an consumer-oriented FX camera (in a D5000 or D90-type body) where the 28-300mm or the 24-120 f/4 VR will be bundled as kit lenses.

lolcatmaster FTW

Problem is the technology is expensive, silicon waffers always have some impurities and if you get to do tons of small sensors then it is ok you will offset and work around the impurities in an easier way, however as sensor get bigger you have less options to go around the impurities and more of the waffer goes to waste.

This said prices have gone down but if you notice in bigger sensors the price decrease has been minimal. As it is today current existent technology can´t do much to reduce the cost of a sensor bigger than APS-C, most of the price increase in higher end cameras are because of sensors like APS-H, Full frame or Medium Format are way more expensive to produce and until there is a way to get waffers that have less impurities it isn´t likely to see a huge price drop in the future.

The Man from Mandrem

Alot of people here mention higher cost for larger die based on yield issues in semiconductor manufacture. Is anyone familiar with the yields manufacturers typically have? I am curious if anyone can provide more detailed information (some publications to read) to understand these topics. I was under the impression that larger design rules for a semiconductor device meant less sensitivity to defects and frequently use of fully depreciated manufacturing tools. Also, irrespective of device, one typically expects device to reduce in cost (getting half as expensive every 18months to 2 years). Curious to better understand why that wouldn’t be the case here.

My thoughts would have been:
There are always things you might do for better performance that will increase the cost of manufacture but that is not related to die size. Of course if you make a larger die with the same design rules, you will have cost proportionally higher and maybe some yield impact (I can’t imagine yield being so low that this would be the 1st order effect) but again the cost should drop per Moore’s Law so the cost of Full size should drop to DX sensor today’s cost in a relatively short time (2 years, 4 years). The volume probably has a bigger effect on pricing of FX vs. DX right now, but that would change if FX became more common. I think DX has some intrinsic benefits but simplifying their lense offerings may be enough reason to keep bringing FX lower in the line as the pricing allows.

Please someone who is knowledgeable about Image CMOS manufacture explain.

PHB

It has been a long time since I was in that business. But target yields have always been in the 75-95% range. If the yields start to drop much below that you start getting to zero really fast.

VLSI production is a multi-step process. And every step has to be perfect for a chip to work. So if you have a 20 step process and a 99% yield at each stage you have a 80% overall yield. If you have only a 98% yield per step you have a 60% yield and if it goes below 97% you might as well give up.

There are some exceptions to this in production of memory chips and other highly repeated designs. There you can switch in a different bank of memory as a replacement if you have a small fault. Intel makes 4 core processors and sells the ones that fail testing as 2 core processors with the faulty core locked out.

But those approaches don’t work for sensor production. Or at least they are much more limited.

Doubling the size of a processor means that you have half the number of sites per wafer, so your costs will be doubled if your yield is 100%. But your nuber of faulty chips will also double, so if your yield is less than 100% your costs will go up more. If your yield on the small sensor is 50% then the costs per sensor will quadruple as your yield is now 25% and you have half the sensors per wafer.

And that is why a D3x sensor can cost such a lot more than a D300 sensor, despite having a larger pixel size.

nestor

Cost is bigger sensor is not directly proportional to sensor size, it is much
more. Supposse a sensor 10 times smaller in size, one imperfevtion left 9 working, in the bigger one none is left.
In addition Moore law doesn´t apply like in general semiconductors,
the idea with microprocessors is to put more in the same surface
or the same in less wafer surface.
Here we have a constant, and it constrains all other variables, FX
is 24x36mm today and tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow and we
can get more pixels for the same price.
Of course, I don´t say anything about profits, it is a complex matter
beyond our reach, perhaps volume could drop costs, but thats another question.

sonysensor

The Sony sensor is??????????????????? YES

noworries

Nikon has always squeezed 1-2 stops more of quality than the sony with the same sensor.

sonysensor

egg-shaped?

cartoon11

I could translate it for you…

Jacobus

WOW!!! WEW give me the 24-120mm 4N

http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

Are those zoom small or what! How about the prices – very reasonable me thinks.

http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

I think the Canon versions are almost twice as big and expensive. See the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM Lens:

I am looking at the 24-120mm f4N actually. I hope this lens is way better than the Canon equivalent/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

Me too, and to replace my D80 kit (18-70mm). For WA I already have the 12-24 f/4, no need for the lower range.

Roger

Chances are it’ll be as bad as the Canon 24-105. Have you looked at that lens? It’s quite bad actually.

I dont see Nikon will make a great lens, seeing it’s even larger zoom range. But, people who buy such a lens arent interested in quality primarily, they just want convenience, so I’ll guess it’ll be ok for them.

Aaron

Actually, the 28-300 in the scan does look nice and small until you look at the mount, and see how small that is… could be pretty hefty.

Bob Howland

Have you looked at the Canon 28-300? It’s a beast, heavier than my 100-400. Besides, unlike the Nikon, it uses a push-pull motion to change focal length, which I hate. I’ll be really interested to see comparisons between the Canon and Nikon lenses.

Aaron

Yeah, I’d be interested to see the comparison. The Canon’s size and weight work against itself in the walk-around incentive. Yet I still know a couple of pros who still swear by it, even on double bodies. (UW + 28-300)

This Nikon looks shorter but much wider than the Canon, judging by the mount.

twoomy

It doesn’t look too far off from the 70-300 VR which is a pretty decent lens and really not too bulky (especially when you compare it to the 70-200 f/2.8 VR).

WoutK89

You know its the third from the left, not the first right?

Jacobus

Yup.. With Nano as well. Plus it is 15mm longer compared to the Canon Equivalent. I hope this is released soon So, we can give it a shot.

Manne

The 24-120 looks good, except for the zoom ring. The wide focal lengths are too close together, as they have been on the nasty 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 VR.

I hope, Nikon has done better with the rest this time. I would love that lens, but, regarding the price, it should be really convincing optically.

What’s the problem with the AF? It’s same as D90 in terms of number of points, and the rumor is that there’s some new contrast focus system for video.

Manne

The D90 AF system for an entry level camera is not so bad. I own a D90 and additionally use a D3 for professional purposes quite often. The 51-point-AF is much better, of course. But I’m absolutely not disappointed with the D90 AF performance.

Roger

Yes, 85mm without VR – THANK GOD!

Anonymous

This D3100 does look like plastic crap. WTF is going on with Nikon?

It is funny, but this plastic crap will have better Video than mighty D3s at 650 EUR. I wonder, the D3s crowd will be pissed. Ah, also as it appears it even has better resolution than the D300s, D90, D5100. In fact, the D3100 in terms of MPs will become the second flagship model of Nikon. I guess Nikon is trying to tell us that it cannot do anything without sony so whatever sony releases we will get an iteration of it.

The invisible man

If you bought a D3s for the video then you don’t deserve a D3s, get a $300 camecorder !

The video on Nikon DSLR is a PLUS, an extra feature because it does not cost billions to add it.

So if the D4 have GPS and you wish get rid of your D3s, you’re welcome to drop it in my trash (don’t even need the lens )!

http://www.robertbromfield.com Robert Bromfield

Haha, good one!

nikkor_2

+1

The D3S rocks for high-end sports photography; at present, there’s no better camera for such work!

superstar

What are you on? How does it matter? If you’re such an authority on this subject, what about HD video being in all the compacts first, entry level SLR second, and moving up. That’s the story with every manufacturer. Or should they have delayed D3S untill the video technology was properly tested and proven? It is well known that Nikon doesn’t jump on every new technology straight away and then proceed to excuse their shortcomings like Canon does.
Seriously, pointless whining is what you’re doing. Whewhe, D3100 has better video than D3S. Well, D3100 is also out almost a year later, but you choose to ignore that fact, don’t you? Whe-whe-whe.

http://micahmedia.com Micah

I’ve repeated over and over, nobody has HD in a dslr with as low as 12mp. Probably has to do with the way they’re pixel binned for video. Canon had trouble getting proper 1080 from even 15mp. So, we just see this theory proven in this model’s specs. 12mp was holding Nikon back from video, despite the excellent image quality.

LGO

This is inaccurate. The lower the mp, the easier it is to produce 1080p HD-video. 12mp in fact is the sweet spot for 4K HD-video although no current camera has the pipeline to support this.

The new Sony sensor (14mp & 16mp) has built-in support for 1080p HD-video. HD-Video support has nothing to do with how many mp the sensor has.

The Man from Mandrem

is it possible the bandwidth for data transfer/processing is chosen based on the MP in still image capture (since that is the primary use of the sensor) and so as a rule of thumb people quote a critical MP x frame rate of capture to support a good implementation of 1080p?

RT

HD video off a Bayer sensor involves a lot of smoke, mirrors and fuzzy math, but the way Canon apparently implements its 1080 mode you are right, 15 mp isn’t enough (even the 21mp on the 5DII is just short). But then look at the GH1, it apparently generates its video in a different way and manages to resolve at least as much if not more than any of the Canons with just 12mp.

Nikon and Pentax look to be using Sony’s new HD sensors so I’d expect video quality over the next year to be, at best, about as good as the NEX-VG10 samples that appeared when Sony announced the camera. For me it’s OK but nothing to get all that excited about, similar to what a hacked GH1 is delivering now. Now if we could get a video mode that’s as good as the D3/700’s 1080 live view feed then THAT would be something to write home about

preston

You can give the “WTF is up with Nikon?” rant a rest. You find a way to repeat it over and over and over again. Also, what’s a D5100?

Mato34

Man, D3100 is a very low-level SLR, so nothing except plastic was expected here.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

Anonymopus, we all know you don’t like Nikon, why do you bother to visit here?

Anonymous

rhlpetrus – we all know that you are hanging out of the butt of Nikon so no matter what crap they announce you will happily pay the premium for seeing the sign of “out of stock!”

And if you go back to D60 launch you’ll see I can be pretty hard on Nikon. But you seem to only have half-empty glasses around.

Victor Hassleblood

“This D3100 does look like plastic crap.”

OMG, it’s an entry level SLR. What is it supposed to look like? A D3X?

“WTF is going on with Nikon?”

Name just one entry level DSLR of any other brand that does not look or feel like plastic. This is clearly not a Nikon issue. I am not a fanboy, but you are getting on my nerves.

enesunkie

I think it’s something he caught from the boys over at CanonRumors. They’re crying because the 60D may just have a plastic body also, so it already is just a crap camera also!

Zoetmb

When I “got back” into photography in 2002, I looked around for a new (film) camera. I was at a photography equipment show and I looked at Canon before Nikon. I don’t remember what model Canon I looked at (it might have been a EOS Elan 7 series), but it looked and felt like a toy, especially with the kit lens. The focusing on the kit lens was shockingly unsmooth. While I knew this was a lower level camera and lens (because I wasn’t sure at the time if I was going to stick with it), I was shocked at what I perceived as a major drop in quality from years before.

I wound up going with a Nikon N80. Now I didn’t wind up taking the kit lens, so the comparison was a little unfair, but it seemed to me at the time that Nikon quality was far superior.

Having said that, there’s nothing wrong with the use of modern composites and plastic in cameras. I’d prefer a lightweight camera over a heavy one any day. My daughter now uses that N80 and even though (or maybe especially because) it uses composite plastics, it looks as good today as it did when it was new. My D70, which also used a fair amount of plastic, also looked as good as new the day I sold it, after several years of intense use. I can’t say the same for my father’s old F3HP, which looks like it was used by a photo-journalist covering a war, but was mostly used for wedding candids and the like. People who argue “plastic=bad, metal=good” are simply completely unsophisticated about modern materials.

Apple has done a lot of work using beautiful, lightweight and environmentally sound metals. One has to wonder why the camera companies haven’t picked up on that. Apple just signed an exclusive agreement with Liquidmetal to use their unique alloy on future “portable electronic devices” which can supposedly make them stronger, lighter and more resistant to corrosion.

http://NikonNative.com heartyfisher

LOL How long have you guys been on the internet.. Thats a classic troll Haha he is laughing at you … yes YOU !!

http://www.gothscapes.com/ O5iris

That’s called… ‘Progress’ and… ‘Moving on’! What’d you expect, for Nikon to be stuck and 720p video and 12MP forever?
Relax, the next models will all follow this trend, you can be 100% sure of that. Today even a D5000 is much better in most ways than the D2x.

Cheers!

http://www.aquahabitat.com David Johnson

I have read the German Foto Digital article. The D95 or D700 replacement will be the news we are looking for at NR. Articles are one thing, actually shooting with them is another. When the D3000 was introduced it was supposed to be very good. I shot with it and it is such a disappointment that I can see the logic in making this the first introduction as their D3000 was a seriously weak link. Nikon better get the D90 replacement right though as that is really the “starting level”. All these lower level models are about just about CoolPix quality. Will it have the best video DSLR Nikon quality yet? Better than D3S? I think that would be a miracle, highly unlikely, and an black eye for Nikon.

nikobe

not many thought that the d3000 was going to be good. we all knew it would be the same camera as d40x and d60 (10mp). this one is going to be much different with added full hd video, higher resolution sensor, and higher iso range. it should be a much better camera, but with the same control options as d40, 40x, 60, and 3000.

D40-owner

Very true.
As I’ve written before on this site, the D3100 will be the first serious and proper update to the D40.
All 40x/60/3000 were crappy sideways changes, not forward updates.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

True, and that was certainly hurting Nikon at the basement dslr level. I like this D3100, may get one to replace my D80 for light shooting and use with DX lenses (12-24 and 18-70), then go for FF for the serious stuff. My next lens could well be this 24-120 f/4, good for DX, in place of the 18-70.

Joel C

18-70mm is a top quality lens, can’t see the 24-120 beating it on IQ

Anonymous

Do you people bemoaning the lack of VR on the 85 f1.4 realize how large that would make the lens? Canon’s equivalents (well, approximate equivalents) don’t have IS; in all honesty, you buy fast glass to use fast apertures. With the high ISO quality of today’s cameras and the f1.4 aperture, you don’t need VR with this new lens.

The invisible man

@Anonymous
My Grandmother does !

Nikkorian

lol. also, i wanna see you grandma behind a d700 with a 85 1.4 VR

superstar

Yeah, now the forum will be full of “no-VR” complainers (as oposed to VR complainers if the lens did indeed have VR). VR on 85mm is not necessary. People should first realise what this lens is for. But most are brainless enough to think that since there was VR on 16-35 now all lenses gotta have it. Not so. 16-35 is a different class lens, and while yes, VR is not THAT necessary on such a wide lens, it does help with f/4 aperture.

preston

I’m not complaining that it doesn’t have VR (cause I can’t afford the lens anyway!), but to say that this lens has a singular purpose (I guess you’re referring to portraits) is a little crazy. There will not be a disclaimer on the box saying “WARNING: THIS LENS WILL ONLY WORK IN A STUDIO ENVIRONMENT. ALL OTHER USES ARE STRONGLY DISCOURAGED BECAUSE THIS LENS IS NOT MEANT FOR THAT”

superstar

Of course not, but the majority will use it for portraits, weddings, social events, just like the current 85mm. The price of this lens will make it a user money-earning lens, not so much playing around lens.
On such level lens manufacturers do not design lenses for someone to “play around”. They’re designed for pros with pro needs in mind.
But still, with or without the sticker this lens will indeed work just fine in any environment, with or without a VR.

nikkor_2

“…the majority will use it for portraits, weddings, social events, just like the current 85mm. The price of this lens will make it a user money-earning lens.”

+1

The optics here should be absolutely outstanding.

http://NikonNative.com heartyfisher

+1
Cant wait to see the output… my eyes are drooling just imagining the bokeh

Aaron

My guess is that it was Nikon’s turn to test the waters on something like introducing a wide-angle VR. And it does have its uses, albethey not too different from one another: handheld long exposures, like capturing a busy street corner and having the people crossing the streets blurred. Having a tripod on a city corner is too much attention. Need yo’ VR fo’ dat. Or urban night stuff, obviously. POV-angle work. Doing dolly-zoom maneuvers, without a dolly. Etc.

The invisible man

About VR:

In photography (as in many other high technology) there is one very important rule : “make is simple, it will last longer and work better”

The only lens I own with VR is my 105mm f/2.8 micro AF-S
I don’t even use the VR for general purpose, but mainly when I do close shoots (you don’t need the VR from 1/2 to 1/1 micro because the flash “freeze” the subject).

And when I have the VR on for “regular” pictures, I hate the “clong-clong” everytime you press half-way on the shutter.

As most of you already know, if you don’t use a tripod you need a shutter speed at least as fast than the lens’s focal (exp: 1/60s for a 50mm 1/125s for a 100mm, etc…)

So, yes, for lenses over 100mm the VR can be very usefull, but overwise it just make the kens more complicated, less reliable, and of course, more expensive !

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

also have teh 105 VR, never used it with vr actually, big waste of specs imo.

GlobalGuy

These are lies, don’t listen to them. The VR in the 105 VR is incredible and works great and is exceptionally helpful. “Most people” know that f/2.8 isn’t actually all that bright, even though its about as good as we can get these days unless you do a dramatic leap to /1.4 (whatever happened to /1.8 and /2 lenses?!?!!?!?). VR is absolutely ESSENTIAL in the 70-300 & the 70-200. Unless you are constantly mated to a tripod.

The 85/1.4 would benefit from VR without a doubt. I know this because the 24-70/2.8 would benefit from VR without a single doubt in my mind and every bit of it is wider.

The only argument that stands is that it would make the lens too big and heavy, which is also likely why its not in the 24-70. But weight would not be an issue for the tripod-artists. And it would be very happily endured by those who walk about and otherwise would have missed their shots with the old AF. As for price, the extra bucks for VR vs non-VR and which is a better value is a side argument. It has a value, simply let’s put it that way. The other comments were too biased towards people who currently love the 85, probably, or who don’t know how to use VR to their advantage amazingly.

Jabs

@superstar – LOL!

Many people are spec-HEADS! They shop like they do for shoes and clothing, sneakers, etc and quote things they do not know about, just to sound educated or enlightened like Jethro (edumacated) of Beverly Hillbillies – LOL!
VR = the ‘in’ thing spec-wise, so complain while unaware as to the role of an 85 F1.4.
Sweet lens though – now for the 105 F2 or such, next – then 135 and we are all set.

Aaron

That could explain people wanting an update. I for one have nothing against non AF-S lenses. I like the raw feel and for most of the higher-end stuff it’s not an issue of speed. Volume is personal preference and I am a bit conscious of it on wide angles where I’m in people’s faces, but for an 85mm where it’s portrait oriented—they know you’re shooting them—and you’re at a decent distance, it shouldn’t be an issue.

So, HOORAY FOR CHEAPER 85mm AF-Ds!

danpe

If Nikon uses the manufacturing speed of Sigma we’ll see that 85/1.4 in the shops next spring …
Specs and price are just important, availability is crucial and I do hope that Nikon keeps getting stuff delivered without another massive drought.

nikkor_2

“Sweet lens though – now for the 105 F2 or such, next – then 135 and we are all set.”

+1

Although some NR commentators will ask for an update to the 80-400 or other lens of interest, I’d personally love to see an update to the 105 or 135.

Marc W.

Everyone is a spec head and cry when a new lens doesn’t have a specific feature… but I wonder if those same spec-heads will run out to buy this $2100 lens. My $800 used 1.4D lens works just great.

Marc W.

Wait, I don’t know where I got $2100 from. The rumor says ~$1700.

Roger

Ha! Spec-heads, I’ll think I’ll steal that line. And it’s sooooo true, these people want VR in every single lens LOL

http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

Why doesn’t my fish-eye have VR??!?

Aaron

VR isn’t just about shutter speeds. It’s a comfort addition. Looking through a stabilized tele, even a short one at 85mm, feels a lot nicer to shoot than without the VR. It’s like the 70-200. I use mine for sports, and I use higher shutter speeds than even the 1/focal length rule, yet I still prefer the VR for the stability when I’m looking through the viewfinder.

superstar

OK, I can agree on the viewfinder experience, but then there’s issue of cost. Of course it’s a pro lens so the cost is not as high on a priority list as it would be with a consumer lens. Still, I’m more happy with this lens without a VR as it will be easier on my pocket. I’d rather save ~$300-400 than have VR on an f/1.4 lens.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

Nikon seems to think that VR takes some quality out of lenses, none of their <100mm pro lenses, primes or zoom, have it.

Anonymous

Except the 16-35mm f/4

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

I don’t consider that at the higher pro level, as I don’t the new 24-120 f/4, like the f/2.8 series or the pro grade primes.

The invisible man

@Anonymous
The 16-35mm f/4 is an excellent zoom but not a pro lens.

Roger

Yes, 16-35 VR is proof you should never put VR where it doesnt belong.

Nikon clearly had to make compromises with that lens just so they can fit VR in there – it’s bigger than the F/2.8 zooms, it’s overpriced, it has distortion almost like a fisheye lens.

Aaron

I was skeptical at first—calculating and moving elements while I move? Sketch. Can’t work digitally in realtime, like “continuous AF,” but hey, you can’t argue with the results.

So, if VR takes some quality out of a lens, I’d love to see a non-VR AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED.

The invisible man

@nikkor 2

I have a customer who tested his 400mm f/2.8 with my Test Charts and he is positive about the fact that you’re loosing a little quality with the VR on.

The VR is usefull when you don’t have the choice, (no tripod and/or very low light).

But remember, it does not make your subject more steady, it only reduce your body’s vibrations.

If I had a 400mm f/2.8 VR, I would not use the VR if I had a tripod or plenty light to reach 1/500s or faster.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

nikkor: vr is essential for long FLs. the 70-200mm has it. I wrote <100mm.

Roger

And Nikon are correct.

http://micahmedia.com Micah

VR takes too large of a clear aperture for a lens like the 85/1.4 to be VR. Even if it was done, the image quality would suffer.

Try shooting a 70-200 with and without VR–it’s certainly long enough to merit VR. But VR has the potential to degrade image quality

http://micahmedia.com Micah

You do realize that 1/80th at f1.4 @ISO400 is quite good in dim incandescent light? And at 1/80th at f1.4 @ISO6400 you’re in light that’s too dim to see well? With current sensors and this lens, you plain don’t need VR, even for video.

Aaron

Hall isn’t talking about gaining shutter speed leeway, but smoothness for video. The difference between VR and no-VR in this case does wonders: you’re no longer tethered to dollies and tracks, but still have the stability to pan and dollyzoom shots, etc. The reason SteadiCam and GlideCam and VariZoom can stay in business. Put VR in our lenses and suddenly that $400 GlideCam doesn’t seem so attractive anymore.

Bob

Must…stop…drinking….COFFEEE……

Dr SCSI

@Anonymous,
You can NEVER have too much light grabbing capability, period. Handheld, low light, action photography is where VR would have put the 85 f/1.4 over the top. Stop down to get some DOF, don’t worry the VR gives it back, oh wait, there is no VR. I agree that high ISOs and fast glass give us oportunities never before realized, but why limit a fast lens to no VR? Why not create both lens types (VR and non-VR) and let sales of the lenses drive the production? I can always turn VR off, I can’t turn it on when it don’t exist. If you only got 1/2 of the 4 stop marketing hype, that would be like getting an 85mm f/.7 with VR! Not .7 equiv. for Bokeh, but for hand held, low-light, slow shutter shutting at 85mm, now that would be worth it to me.

D40-owner

WTF is that scan!??!?? It is the worst scan of a magazine I’ve seen in years!
You can’t even see the details on the lenses!

D40-owner

Admin: Please request to the magazine leaker a better scan, this is crap!

Bob

It must have been scanned with a Canon!

Bob

Yeahm and I can’t believe it’s in german as well….it should be in American!!!!

The f/1.2 lenses all have problems compared to the f/1.4 designs, in the CA depatment and also at mid f/numbers. I just can’t think of use for 1/3 stop for an 85mm lens.

http://NikonNative.com heartyfisher

You have to see the images.. I have a friend with that canon 85 1.2L if you are a dedicated 85mm portrait shooter you would be using a canon.

http://bit.ly/9NIXQ David Hasselblaff

Or a hassy.

Roger

Naaaaaaah.

Canon scores higher on the snob-scale (“IT”S F/1.2 WOOOOW! MILLION TIMES BETTER THAN THE NIKKOR, w00t w00t!!!!!”), in actual use it shares the same problems with all fast 85s – CA is a nightmare (yes it is, I’ve used it), center sharpness is similar, it’s also the slowest focusing lens in the solar system.

Great lens, but let’s not pretend it’s perfect.

Nikoniastu

But are you willing to buy this lens if instead of being a f/1.4 was a f/1.2?
Is like moaning that the new Ferrari has 15 HP less than the Bugatti when I don’t have the money to buy neither of them.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

it’s more like 400 HP

Roger

Not to mention that Bugatti is bloody UGLY.

Marc W.

Bye.

Bob

Ciao! You can drop off all your equipment in a box and mail it to me, okay?

Rafael

that 85mm f1.4 G N – sure looks beautiful! I just hope it has a ¨petal¨ lenshood

Stepper

Unless they give it the same crappy 70-200mm Vr II lens hood.
That thing is the worst ever!

superstar

Hehe, if I was from Nikon I’d be like “what the hell do you people want?! make up your mind!”

Rafael

man.. that 85mm its going to be in backorder, for a year! keep your hands off it! I want it! grrrrr

Alex

@Admin, are you expecting continuous AF with the D3100?

Vladi

24-120 and 28-300 ranges too big to be any good. Surely can’t be compared to 24-70 IQ wise.

superstar

Of course it will! Didn’t you hear – Nikon is handing out pro lenses at consumer prices!!

Lolly

The 24-120 f/4 in the photo has a gold ring and “N” for nano-coating .. did you notice ? Gold ring Nikkors are designed and built to a higher standard. Do you know any bad gold ring Nikkors ?

superstar

Sure it has an “N” and gold ring. 16-35 has an “N” and gold ring. It’s a great lens, but by your logic should it equal 14-24 in IQ?
Same with 24-120 to 24-70 comparison.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

You are right, just with Canon f/4, they area L lenses but not at same level as the f/2.8 line in IQ terms.

Vladi

just wondering, as someone mentioned earlier that they hope 24-120 will be better than canon’s 24-105. i think if it manages to be equal in IQ to canon with this extended range, we should call it a success. if it will be better, nikon surely bent the rules which exist in physics

http://NikonNative.com heartyfisher

dont think physics have any thing to do with pricing of nikkor lenses and IQ vs canon

superstar

I’m not being negative, I just mean that there also a couple of grades of gold ring NIKKORs – high pro and almost pro. 24-120 could be well deserving the gold circle, but expecting f/2.8 class performance is a little far fetched.

http://micahmedia.com Micah

The 12-24 is a POS and it’s got a gold ring.

Gerry

“POS” is far from the truth.

Lolly

It looks like I opened a can of worms here. Each lens, gold-ring or not, is bought by you for a specific reason – image quality, build, size, weight, cost – for an intended use. I did not compare Nikkors in my comment because each Nikkor is unique in its own way. I was merely pointing out that a gold-ring Nikkor is usually of a better ‘quality’ than non-gold-ring Nikkors. Will a gold-ring Nikkor be good enough for your intended use, well that depends on you.

CanadianPete

I had always understood that the gold ring simply means the lens has ED glass elements. Granted, Nikon would be expected to reserve those expensive ingredients for higher-end telephotos/zooms, but I didn’t think it had anything to do with, say, build quality.

Marc W.

Nope (I had to check and verify myself), look at the 18-70mm DX, ED but no ring. The 18-55mm has a silver ring.

I Am Nikon

If Canon got “L” lenses, then Nikon got the “N” lenses.

N Lenses are Nikon’s best lenses.

P

Thanks! At least I don’t have any trouble to save my money when I saw those new lenses. 85 1.4 VR had give me GAS.

JD

You can do better scan with your mobile phone..

http://davidandstella.wordpress.com/ David

Nothing on the D3100 says DX (just dreaming…)

The invisible man

The size of the prism says…..DX

http://davidandstella.wordpress.com/ David

That was a very short dream!

nikkor_2

And how!

Martin

The lens on the D3100 pic says “AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm …”. Sorry for waking you up

Renee Teunissen

Great news – can you post the complete scan – some (dutch) people can read german

@Stutee, you just called yourself a Jelly donut. Don’t you mean Ich Bin Berliner? Personally, I would like Nikon to upgrade their 18-70 3.5-4.5 G to an 18-70 3.5 G N. I don’t need VR.

Manne

The grammar was completely fine

But ‘Berliner’ is of course also the short term for the Berlin style of a jelly donut, strictly speaking a ‘Berliner Pfannkuchen’. The short term ‘Berliner’ is widely used in the north and west of Germany, while the Berliners themselves just call it a ‘Pfannkuchen’.

This kind of donuts is called a ‘Krapfen’ in Bavaria or a ‘Kreppel’ in the southwest.

Names for bakery products in Germany are certainly a worthwhile subject for studies.

http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

I am not sure if I can post the whole article because of copyright issues – after all the magazine costs money. The article is really small and it doesn’t say anything more than what we already know.

Astrophotographer

Many on the web seem to forget about copyright.

I bet the magazine is in hot water over an NDA.

I can see the Pythonesque discussion between Nikon and he magazine.

Nikon: you can release the news the 3rd Thursday in August.
Magazine: Right, the 2nd Thursday.

http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

yes, under the “fair use” clause I can use copyrighted materials to prove my point, but up to a certain extend – scanning a whole article and posting it online probably falls outside the “fair use”. I am sure some other sites will scan it and post it online in the next few hours. I can then post a link.

Marc W.

Can you scan part of the article on here, then *give* CanonRumors another can to post, etc.

Richard

If it is still on the web, just link it or the Google cache. Otherwise just try the first part and see if there are any interesting items before posting the rest.

Anonymous

Any word on if the D3100 will have in-camera lateral chromatic correction like the D5000? I realize you can take care of it in raw, but still just wondering.

Features of the new expeed2?

http://www.bonzo.com bonzo

Nice entry camera.
Same shutter as D40, D5000? 1/500 sync?

Good lens choices anyway – at least they didn’t make some 18-XXX zoom again, and put at least 3 lenses appropriate for full frame users.

55-300 will be a nice replacement for 70-300, hope it is better at 300 at 5.6 than 70-300.

Unfortunately, those waiting for telephoto updates like 180/2.8,300/4,80-400 will have to wait at least another year as it seems .

WoutK89

the intended replacement is 55-200 as it is a DX lens

Stepper

I really don’t like the “slouching shoulders” aesthetics of this line. I sure hope Nikon keeps this styling in the entry level bodies and returns to the broad shoulder styling of the D2 series for the upper models.

http://www.rafaljacniak.pl Fotograf Katowice

Wow, very realistic fake i think…. little glimmer of hope it was true. Especially when it comes to new Nikkor AF-S 85/1.4G. But… price, price, price ! – it will be decisive !

shivaswrath

no VR on 85 1.4!! I figured. . .

Nikoniastu

You don’t need VR on an 85mm lens and even less when is a 1.4. If its huge without VR, can you imagine it with VR?

Roger

Can you imagine that it’d be worse optically if it had VR? Larger, more expensive too?

I love gear heads, they want VR in every lens. Always chasing those specs…..

Dr SCSI

Some of us are just chasing light! VR helps you capture it. VR is just another tool. A lens without VR is like hammer without the claw, it sure hammers nicely, but every now and then you need to pull a nail!

Anonymous

What’s peculiar is that this camera’s ISO is now looking
Like it’s better than the D700’s. ISO 12800 is D3s territory.
The D700’s main claim to fame is it’s low light capability.
Albeit, the 3100 does not have the focal point quantity,
But other than that it just put the D700 in the obsolete category.
So, now what? They going to try and sell a D700x with less than
This new body has for more money? Hardly likely.
The D700x will need to raise the bar even further. Boggles the mind
Speculating about what it could be.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

C’mon ano, you know it’ll never ever be of same IQ as D700, etc. Video is being introduced at the lower level cameras first, for obvious reasons, technology is not where it should at the moment.

D700 is a semi-pro/pro level stills camera, not a toy (albeit a good one) like this D3100. I’ll get one, likely, for light family shooting, replace the D80 for the DX lenses, and get a D700+ next year when it arrives (and it’ll have new pro AF, likely 18+MP and state of art video).

Anonymous

I love the way you turn it to an advantage Nikon’s impotence of delivering 1 camera that can handle full HD. Give me a break, Nikon is behind when it comes to video for big time.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

Video is not hurting Nikon sales very hard, given recent sales figures released recently. But they are important for entry-level, more so than at the higher ones. Just yesterday, a friend asked me what I thought about the T2i. He said it had fulHD video and that was relevant. When I commented that Nikon would be releasing a new camera with fullHD soon, he said he’d wait to see it, since another friend had told him Nikons are better made ( ). Today I sent this link to him, let’s see his reaction.

Anonymous

@ rhlpetrus – the point I was trying to make that at this level there is not much difference between brands. OTOH, Nikon is late and I cannot see any innovation at this level from nikon. This will become Coolpix #2 segment since in Coolpix #1 Nikon provides crap. It is clear that sony will provide the sensor and there is nothing wrong with that but still I find Nikon too slow.

In addition, I would like to ask you to go back in time and read the posts about the D3s release and how everyone was defending the 720p. You will enjoy it because at that time there was a bit different explanation of the Nikon incompetence of delivering full HD at any levels of dslr.

I find it very sad the blindness of many Nikon fans. I am talking about that if somebody criticises the mighty Nikon then all kinds of explanations come up without being critical at all. Bottom line is that the above release looks very lame to me and I am disappointed that takes a nasty advantage of the F-mount and does not deliver in timely manner.

EmmKayFive

It will Get continuos af during video – premiered on the Sony nex-series this is certainly an innovation that puts it ahead.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

i never defended 720p, probably it was some technological limitation of the 12MP sensor

Anonymous

You could be right. At this time everything is speculation.
I have a D700, and a D300. While they’re both capable in many ways, in other ways they’re not and I long for something that delivers what I try to accomplish with these rigs.
I dont give a hoot about video. What I want are crystal clear pics in any situation. Whether it be studio, action, low light, ambient or flash. I want it all, and I want high res to boot. I’m rady for 25+, and truly would prefer something past 30mp. I want the body that’s going to endure through my life’s journey. These two bodies have had the crap kicked out of them, and both are due for a refief pitcher. I have put nearly 70,000 shots on each and stuff is starting to fall off. I’m sure I could get a few buck sfor each rig, and I’ll need it cuz it’s likely that I”l have to settle for a D3s type AND a D3x type. But I hope the new body will combine both in a pleasing way.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

The D3100 and D95(name?) are just the start of new generation of Nikon bodies. The D400 and D700+ (D800?) will be great cameras.

As for >24 MP, I think that will have to wait a bit, the line shows D60+, D400, D4, D700+ (both at about 18MP), then D4X, and it may well be that the higher MP sensor will never be used for D700 line. The Dnx could be the only line with highest resolution sensor, using slow readout for maximum DR, not very good high ISO, etc.

Anonymous

If the D4 will only have 18MP, many Nikon fans will be mad. Besides, how would you address challenge from sony with a 24MP and 30MP cameras? Or from Canon which will apparently be 32MP?
18Mp will look very crappy 1-2 yrs down the road just think about it for a second. Also, do you think that Nikon will replace the D4 within 2yrs since we know that Panasonic expects 20+ MPs in 2 yrs.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

why, the D4 will be, like D3, an action PJ camera, who needs lots of MP for that? AF, low light ability and fps are more relevant. The D3s is still the best seller action camera, even after almost 3 years after D3’s release.

Richard

Nikon needs to realize that there is a substantial portion of their customer base who really do not want a camera which is compromised by video and who want the money spent on making a better still camera.

Roger

Video doesnt compromise your camera. Really, it doesnt.

Richard

Even if it does not actually reduced in IQ compared to the same body without video, there are costs of R&D and manufacture which, IMO, would be better spent on making a better still camera. I am certain that there is a market for bodies with video, but I am equally certain there is a market for bodies without video.

Roger

Video sells, brother. Look at the 5D II. It sells in much higher numbers than the 5D, video guys are snapping it up.

Video = more cameras sold, more money for R&D, you get better cameras in the future.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ rhlpetrus

What does it say about the new AF system? Is there one, actually, or was it just a rumour?

Derek

Can we have a better scan please ? Or even better a photo of the article ?

sridhanush

Here is the google translation for the above scan:

“Even before the Photokina Nikon presents a beginner’s camera, which can in functionality and image quality can be measured quite well with more expensive models. Digital photo had the opportunity to unterziehn during the imagination to D3100 you a quick check first” …

If you could give the complete scan, we could decipher more

http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

As I said, posting the whole article/page online may be a copyright violation (posting pieces is ok). The article doesn’t say anything more – see the last two post on NR – I updated them with the latest translation.

sridhanush

Oh! I missed that point! Anyway, i guess thats a whole of info that you have given us, i appreciate you sharing it!

MW

Thanks NR team for all the latest news, I’m in the market for new lenses so all this info is much appreciated!

maddin

yea we want the whole article if possible…

WoutK89

Buy the magazine

enesunkie

They wouldn’t be able to read it anyway:)

Anonymous

From where?

cirtap

Dear Nikon….

This lil camera stuff does not matter to me…..Here many months ago I placed my order with you guys at Nikon…

My New Camera should reflect what I ordered…

24mp OR MORE…..FULL FRAME….I don’t care about Video in my new D4…But YOU all will place one in…Make sure it is 1080p at 60 frames per second..With Stereo Mic,,,and Auto Focus…. I don’t care about shooting a ISO at 12,800 but you guys will do that anyway….

Say it Nikon People…D4..D4..D4!!!!!!

Derek

I make wonderfull prints in 4 x 4m with only 12mp…
The scalers are very excellent in all ways.
No need more, really.

http://www.www.com Anonymous

D800…D800…D800!!!

http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

a small update on the AF-S 85/1,4 G N lens – it contains 10 lens elements in 9 groups (the old version had 9 elements in 8 groups)

Rafael

nice ! new optical design! cant wait

nikkor_2

“…it contains 10 lens elements in 9 groups (the old version had 9 elements in 8 groups)”

Is the price on the new 85mm f/1.4 = $1,650 (as rumored at NR on 6 August 2010)?

Or is it 1,650 euros (as rumored earlier today at NR)?

WoutK89

dont take the exchange rates for calculating price, usually $ = €

nikkor_2

Thanks, WoutK89.

lolcatmaster FTW

that´s around 300 more than the Canon version and too close to the 24-70mm f2.8 :/ me thinks they are kinda coo-coo.

Edson

Is the 28-300mm still around $350 USD? Cause damn that’s unreasonably low! Looks like that lens will be a new hot seller.

Victor Hassleblood

Wow,
1,000 Euros are just 350 USD. Shit, I always wanted to buy some USDs but didn’t. Now would be the time to sell them. Or maybe you are just mistaken?

Still, 1,000 Euros seems unreasonably low compared with the canon equivalent. If this lens (28-300) delivers the same qualities it could become the videographers lens of choice for doing impressive zooming. Of course, we first need to see an impressive VDSLR from Nikon.

Zoetmb

No..1000 Euros is $1275 USD

http://www.bonzo.com bonzo

Any news about the new Nikon AF(-S)/VR compatible extension tubes?

Friend of mine (75 years old) would like to know if there is any hope.

http://NikonNative.com heartyfisher

?? Extension tubes mean macro and vr is useless with macro work…

Nikoniastu

You maked me laugh with your friend’s comment!!!

preston

Just get the Kenko tubes. All electronic controls including aperture and VR work through these. I actually have used VR with my Kenkos for macro when I was up in a tree (no place for a tripod). It worked better than I was expecting!

Lola

Boy do people here like to moan, it’s irrelevant what any new camera or lens is announced as most will still complain.
Buy yourself a FM or FM2 and a couple of rolls of Velvia, you might learn something.

Marc W.

Amen.

Broxibear

Double Amen…well an atheist Amen since I don’t believe in all that lol.
But being serious for a min, I don’t think 90% of the people who post here would be able to differentiate between an image taken on a Coolpix and one taken on a D3x.
They scour the forums and camera sites looking at 100% crops desperately trying to find minute differences that never show up in the real world.
That’s not what photography is about…at least it isn’t for me.

ArthurCH

+1
Also, I wonder what people want to do with a D700-successor that they can’t do with a D700.

Broxibear

You’re right Arthur, what are they going to do with it ?
The D700 is an anstounding camera, I nearly bought one but I needed a full frame viewfinder so opted for something else.
It’s just an obsession to have the latest camera, with the highest MP, which deludes them into thinking they can take good pictures.
Cameras don’t take good pictures…photographers do.
Whatever camera they buy I hope they’re happy with it and most of all take images with it.

Where’s my….

I can only tell you what people like me want to do with the D700 successor that they do not want to do with D700: Buy it.

That’s because I bought a D300 right before D700 was launched, and couldn’t at that time justify the cost of trading in the freshly acquired D300 for the D700. Now the resale value of my D300 is way down and D700 is old by all digital means and I still don’t want to go for the studio size D3x or D3s, even less so because of the price.

Chips are now smaller, faster and cheaper and D700 price is still almost the same as when it was launched.

I would be more than enthusiastic to send my savings the way of something with the D3s magic ISO tech and video, just for the heck of it, trickled down to a D700 size body with upgraded DSP/IO bus/CF controller that could bottleneck a recent 90MB/s CF card.

While Nikon is coming up with exactly what I want I’m happy exposing BW400CN, Ektar 100 and Velvia 50 in my FE2’s, F100 and F80 for my full frame likes.

John

Nice surprise. I was expecting the D3100 to use the 12 mp sensor from the D90. I doubt the D90 replacement will use the same sensor as the D3100 so it seems likely that the D90 and D300 replacements will move to 16 mp sensors. If Nikon can make that move while keeping the high ISO quality excellent, then I can’t wait for these new cameras.

David

The one disappointment is that the 85mm doesn’t have VR. I know I’ll probably get flamed for saying that, but it would be nice for when you want a little more depth of field or when its darker out.

Still interested in it though, I do assume the optics will be amazing and the AF-s will be an aded bonus over the older model.

Jose

The 28-300mm looks quite compact, so we finally have the much demanded FX equivalent of the DX 18-200mm. At last long a decent walk-around lens or the d700 owners!

Marc W.

Decent how? We don’t know how well it performs. It could perform as bad as the current 24-120mm

PapaLiam

I can’t wait for the 28-300. I’m really tired of luging around 2 lenses on “family fun” trips. The D700 is heavy enough.

Marc W.

Your two lenses might weight as much as this one.

Nikoniastu

I wonder if the 28-300 will have a tripod collar?. I think is a must for this beast.

I’m thinking it could be 200-6400 with LO-1 and HI-1. I don’t think the D90 has a HI-2 and only a HI-1, so I could see the lower end consumer cameras sticking with that.

MB

New 24-120 is twice the price of recently discontinued older one … I would advice getting the old one while you can because I doubt there will be any significant difference.

Nikkor AF-S 85 seams sweet, too bad it lacks VR and at 1650€ it really should have it.

D3100 uses Sony sensor, maybe exactly the same as the one in Sony NEX models, but Nikon always lies about the usable size of the sensor. By the way Expeed is not a processor but the software and real silicon processor in D3 running this software is way faster then anything build in lower priced cameras. No doubt it will be better camera than D3000 but at 650€ it should be able to compete with Canon 550d head to head and that is just not the case, wonder if Nikon will loose new customers base because one usually stick with DSLR brand they bought the first time and there is a little reason to go for this one at suggested price comparing to competition.
All in all let us hope D90 replacement is something really good …

lolcatmaster FTW

why would you buy the old one? the old one was REALLY bad… really soft :/, the new one is a response to Canon´s F/4 L lenses (17-40mm, 70-200mm, 70-200mm IS and 24-105 IS) which sport great optics at a much better price for pro´s who are on a budget or that don´t really need a fast lens (studio shooters as an example many won´t be using f/2.8 in the studio for really long periods of time).

Also the bet of Nikon of doing f/4 lenses is to capture the market of people wanting to migrate from other brands to Nikon, these lenses will allow them to have top notch lenses that they can afford after they sell their other brand cameras and lenses.

Nikon never uses the same design of Sony sensors they use the same base but the whole readout technology is different and in the end you can see the gap between Nikon´s image quality and Sony´s…

the D3000 competed with the lower entry level model from canon which is the rebel XS (1000D), the D5000 is the one that competed directly with the higher entry 550D.

Now if the D90 succesor can after all this year inherit all the customizations of the AF system the D200 had then it will be good, but if they keep limiting it then it will be the same crap all over again.

pete

well to begin with its a stop better at 120mm, in fact its probably a stop better from around 70mm depending on when the 24-120 goes to f5.6. that in and of itself is enuf reason for people to buy the newer one. aside from the fact that the older version is a dog of a lens.

Roger

Too bad it lacks VR? LOL

Nikon do the right thing by not compromising the optics of the new 85/1.4, and the gear heads bash them for it. Same old same old.

DB

A question by a newbie: don’t all current Nikon G zoom lenses have the zoom ring on the mount side, on the pictures here its looks like the zoom ring is closer to the front lens. Wouldn’t that be confusing for users? Or is it a sign that the pictures for the lenses ar false? Or am I totally wrong here?

What about the DX 18-200mm VR or 16-85mm VR? As these are FX equivalent zooms, it’s quite logical that they employ the same focus/zoom ring layout.

DB

You are right, I didn’t know about these 2 DX lenses. But I don’t see the 24-120 as an equivalent of any of these 2.
Admin or other experienced FX lens users, do you have an opinion on this?
The more I look at the presented picture of the lenses the more I think they are badly photoshoped and not real.

Stepper

ATTENTION 85mm f1.4D Owners!

The new 85mm is coming! Make sure you put your old -outdated 85mm 1.4 up on Ebay while the prices are still good. Also make sure you make your starting bids low – preferably $1.00! It won’t hurt my feelings either if you list them with the one day acution option. Just let me know when you post ‘em.

Marc W.

ha, nice try.

Simon

If the new 85mm is inferior to the old one, the old one may worth more!
The possibility is high, because the old lense is nearly perfect.

Rafael

I disagree, the center focus issue on the old one, is a big defect in my opinion. Besides for Portraits having that AFS motor is a blessing.

ArthurCH

24-120 looks nice, and smaller than I feared it would be. Same for the 28-300. And finally the new 85 will be there! Don’t have the money, but still excited these lenses are coming anyway!

Richard

Now that this is a reasonably hard leak, we can look forward to just what the sensors of the other bodies will be. With an entry level camera at 14 MP I can not see Nikon having lesser resolution sensors for their more expensive bodies, with the possible exception of continuing the D3S even when the D4 is released to deal with extreme low light sports/PJ work (unless Nikon comes up with a higher resolution sensor which equals or exceeds the D3S’ low light performance in the D4).